generals

A state judge Thursday rejected a challenge to how California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta’s office summarized a strict new voter ID measure on November ballots — ruling that the summary language accurately describes the measure’s effects were it to pass.

Another judge dealt the backers of the measure a second loss by tentatively finding that their description of the measure, submitted for the official state voter’s guide, was misleading. They had claimed that Proposition 39 would make voting easier.

In the first case, Sacramento Superior Court Judge Jennifer K. Rockwell ruled that the label, title and summary of the certified ballot measure accurately describe Proposition 39 as a measure that “prohibits citizens from voting” — language the measure’s backers specifically objected to — unless they provide a government-issued ID.

According to minutes from a Thursday hearing on the matter, Rockwell concluded that, to the extent the measure’s backers object to that language, they are objecting to “the provisions of the measure itself.”

Rockwell rejected the argument put forth by the measure’s backers that it would not prevent people without ID from voting, only their votes from being counted — a distinction the judge found lacking.

Both parties had asked the court to move quickly ahead of printing deadlines for November ballots.

The attorney general’s office is responsible for preparing titles and summaries for ballot measures, and is not required by law to use the same language as a measure’s proponents when gathering the necessary voter signatures to place the measure on the ballot.

Bonta’s office had argued in court that his office applied the same standard of review to the voter ID measure as every other ballot measure that has come before his office.

Bonta praised Rockwell’s decision on social media Thursday, writing that it “confirms what we have said from the start: the ballot materials at issue — the ballot title and summary and ballot label — give a true and impartial statement of Proposition 39’s chief purpose and points.”

“My office followed the law and fulfilled its duty to provide California voters with clear, accessible, and accurate information,” he wrote. “We’re pleased that the court agreed with us.”

California Assemblymember Carl DeMaio (R-San Diego), the chief backer of the court challenge and chairman of the group Reform California, responded to the ruling with a video post to social media, writing that it was “expected” but nonetheless “disappointing.”

DeMaio accused Bonta of trying to “manipulate the vote” with “rigged” language, and Rockwell of being a “liberal judge” who had unsurprisingly decided that Bonta “gets to do corruptly what he wants to do.”

“It’s pissing me off,” DeMaio said in his video post.

DeMaio predicted that Proposition 39 will still pass, but that it will take “all of us spreading the word that the attorney general has tried to manipulate the title on the ballot measure.”

Voter ID requirements are being pushed by Republicans across the country — from President Trump down — as necessary to prevent voter fraud, including by noncitizens, despite elections experts saying that such fraud is exceedingly rare and that there is no evidence that it exists in volumes large enough to swing elections.

Democrats, including in California, have argued that states already have robust measures to ensure that only eligible voters cast ballots, including through existing security measures such as signature verification. They said stricter voter ID requirements would lead to eligible voters without ready access to documents being denied access to voting — including poorer, elderly and rural voters and married women who have changed their names.

A majority of California voters back stricter voter ID requirements, according to recent polls.

The Trump administration has been pressing for new voter ID requirements nationwide, including in Congress, without success.

Passage of Proposition 39 in liberal California would represent a massive win for the administration and a setback for California’s Democratic leaders. It would require substantial reforms to how the state accepts ballots both in person and through the mail — the latter being the preferred option for the vast majority of voters in recent California elections.

Backers of Proposition 39 also took a hit in a separate court proceeding Thursday, where another judge — siding with top Democratic lawmakers — issued a tentative finding that the measure’s backers were misleading voters by claiming in voter guide language that the measure would make voting easier in the state were it to pass.

“It is hard to conceive how it would be ‘easy’ or ‘easier’ to vote if a voter has to take the extra step of either bringing government-issued identification when voting in person or search for their government-issued identification and supply the last four digits if they vote by mail,” wrote Sacramento Superior Court Judge Shelleyanne Chang.

The voter guide language will need to change as a result.

California leaders who brought the challenge — including State Senate President Pro Tempore Monique Limón (D-Goleta) and Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas (D-Hollister) — praised the decision.

“Prop 39 is a MAGA-backed power grab by Donald Trump’s closest allies,” Rivas said in a statement. “As today’s ruling underscores, Prop 39 isn’t about election security or fair elections — the real goal of the MAGA activists who wrote Prop 39 is to make it harder for Californians to vote.”

DeMaio denounced the decision, accusing Chang of having “sided with the politicians” in California to “strike legitimate arguments on why Voter ID is needed to improve election integrity.”

EXPLAINER

Several Ukrainian and Russian generals have been fired from their militaries over the course of the war in Ukraine.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has sacked his military chief Oleksandr Syrskii in the latest reshuffle in the country’s defence apparatus after days of protests following the ouster of the defence minister.

Here is a closer look at what happened in the latest instance, alongside all the top shakeups in Ukraine and Russia over their four-year war.

Who was Oleksandr Syrskii?

Syrskii, 60, was born in Soviet Russia, in July 1965 and studied at a Red Army academy in Moscow.

In the 1980s, he was deployed to Ukraine, then part of the Soviet Union. After this, he remained in Ukraine and studied at the National Defence University of Ukraine in Kyiv, joining the ranks of the newly independent Ukrainian army.

In 2014, he commanded Ukrainian troops fighting a Moscow-backed armed rebellion in the eastern Donetsk region.

In 2019, he became head of Ukraine’s land forces and led the country into war when Russia invaded in February 2022. In the early months of the war, he was named a “Hero of Ukraine”, the country’s highest honour, because of his successful defence of Kyiv.

Syrskii is credited with planning Ukraine’s counteroffensive around Kharkiv from July to September 2022, which became one of Kyiv’s biggest victories and led to the recapture of the strategically significant Kupiansk and Izyum cities.

What’s the context for Syrskii’s removal?

The removal came after six days of protests in the capital, Kyiv, caused by the removal of Defence Minister Mykhailo Fedorov, who had previously clashed with Syrskii.

Fedorov, who was seen by many as pivotal to the war effort, was removed from his post last week, leading to widespread anger across Ukraine. Before his dismissal, the former defence minister had accused Syrskii of blocking his reform efforts.

In place of Syrskii, Zelenskyy has appointed Mykhailo Drapatyi to lead the military.

“I am grateful to Oleksandr Syrskyi and to every one of our warriors for Ukraine’s strong front-line positions,” Zelenskyy said in a statement on social media. “I am grateful to Mykhailo Drapatyi for holding that same view.”

“Our shared wish is one – victory over the enemy and conditions at the front and in pressure on Russia that would force Russia toward peace,” he added.

Zelenskyy emphasised the need to address friction within the military leadership and resolve persistent issues concerning mobilisation and front-line management.

Zelenskyy said Tuesday’s decision to appoint Drapatyi was made to “reset” the ongoing defence against Russia’s invading troops.

Which other generals has Ukraine fired during the war?

More than 10 Ukrainian generals have been fired from their positions over the course of the war.

Here are some of the most major instances:

• In September 2023, Zelenskyy removed his Defence Minister Oleksii Reznikov over corruption allegations.
• In February 2024, Zelenskyy dismissed Valerii Zaluzhnyi from his position as military commander-in-chief. Zelenskyy appointed Syrskii to take his place.
• In June 2024, Zelenskyy introduced Andrii Hnatov as the new commander of the Joint Forces Command, replacing Yuriy Sodol.

What about Russia?

Over the four-year war, which began in February 2022, Russia has had its fair share of reshuffling in its own military. Here are some major instances:

• In August 2022, Vice Admiral Igor Osipov, who commanded the Black Sea Fleet, was fired. He was first suspended after the fleet’s flagship Moskva was sunk in April 2022.
• In July 2023, Moscow’s military leadership dismissed Major-General Ivan Popov, commander-in-chief of Russia’s 58th Combined Arms Army stationed in southern Ukraine, over his concerns for troops fighting without rest and criticism of Russian battlefield strategy.
• In August 2023, Russia removed Sergey Surovikin, nicknamed “General Armageddon”, from his post as commander of Russia’s Aerospace Forces. Surovikin was linked to the Wagner mercenary group and was dismissed two months after its short‑lived mutiny against Russia’s military leadership.

Khartoum, Sudan – As drone attacks rain down on el-Obeid and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) tighten their months-long siege, the capital of North Kordofan has emerged as the latest flashpoint in Sudan’s grinding war of attrition.

Despite mounting international alarm and renewed US diplomatic pressure aimed at securing a nationwide truce, Sudan’s warring generals remain deeply entrenched. Both the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the RSF appear locked in a pursuit of outright military victory, largely sustained by a continuous flow of foreign weapons.

Through the lens of the escalating crisis in el-Obeid, a grim reality is unfolding: Civilian suffering is increasingly weaponised amid polarised domestic narratives, while geopolitical manoeuvring repeatedly stalls any viable path to peace.

A strategic prize and international alarm

El-Obeid holds immense strategic value. Located 550km (340 miles) southwest of Khartoum, it acts as the primary gateway linking Khartoum to the vast Darfur region. The city is also a major military stronghold, hosting the SAF’s 5th Infantry Division, known as “Al-Hagana”, and has become a refuge for hundreds of thousands of displaced civilians fleeing violence elsewhere.

The looming threat of a full-scale ground invasion has triggered urgent global warnings. Recently, 38 international nongovernmental organisations (NGOs), alongside the UN and countries including Qatar, sounded the alarm over the escalating use of drones and the potential for mass atrocities, warning that el-Obeid could face the same devastation recently seen in el-Fasher.

Yet these warnings have failed to alter the calculus on the ground.

Polarised narratives of a stalled peace

Recent United States diplomatic efforts, led by Massad Boulos, an adviser to US President Donald Trump, have pushed for a comprehensive ceasefire. However, the push for peace has collided with absolute domestic polarisation.

SAF commander Abdel Fattah al-Burhan has firmly rejected unconditional truces, stating that the army will operate with the precision of “digging with a needle” until the RSF is entirely dismantled.

This deadlock reflects a deeply fractured political landscape. Fathi Abu Ammar, a Sudanese academic, told Al Jazeera that the SAF is primarily responsible for the prolonged suffering by obstructing peace initiatives and refusing to establish safe corridors for civilians to leave el-Obeid.

He accused the army of using the city’s residents as “human shields” to garner international sympathy, while arguing that the RSF is fighting to address legitimate historical grievances.

Conversely, Sudanese journalist and political analyst Yousef Abdel Mannan vehemently rejected these claims.

Speaking to Al Jazeera from Sudan, Abdel Mannan accused the RSF of widespread atrocities, including a recent drone attack on a girls’ school in el-Obeid and the systematic killing of thousands of civilians in el-Fasher, including patients inside the Saudi Hospital.

Abdel Mannan dismissed the US-backed truce proposals as inadequate measures that merely “treat the wounds of the conflict while leaving the root cause intact”, arguing that only a comprehensive political settlement, not a temporary ceasefire, can resolve the crisis.

He maintained that civilians in el-Obeid are not being held hostage by the army, but rather prefer to remain in their homes rather than face displacement at the hands of paramilitaries.

Foreign arms and the geopolitical deadlock

Beneath the domestic blame game lies a critical factor sustaining the conflict: Foreign interference.

David Shinn, a former US diplomat and assistant secretary of state for African affairs, noted that despite years of US engagement and sanctions targeting both SAF and RSF leaders, neither side has shown a genuine interest in halting the violence.

“There is a desire from both sides to continue fighting until one side wins,” Shinn told Al Jazeera.

The escalating use of uncrewed aerial vehicles (UAVs) over el-Obeid underscores this external lifeline. “Neither the RSF nor the Sudanese army manufactures drones,” Shinn pointed out, meaning these advanced weapons must be imported.

He highlighted that the warring parties are actively backed by regional powers, pointing to the United Arab Emirates as a backer of the RSF, and Egypt and Saudi Arabia as supporters of the SAF, arguing that the conflict has transformed into a proxy war.

For the siege of el-Obeid to end and a genuine peace process to begin, the geopolitical spigot must be turned off.

Until the international community forces external actors to halt their military support, analysts warn that Sudan will remain hostage to a war its generals believe they can still win.

For two weeks, the fate of Major General Rabe Abubakar (rtd) had become a barometer for testing whether Nigerian authorities could secure the release of a high-ranking military officer from the hands of terrorists operating in the northwestern region.

The answer came on Saturday, June 13, in a press statement by Nasiru Muazu, Katsina’s Commissioner for Internal Security and Home Affairs. The retired general could not be rescued, the Katsina government itself said. Rabe, who served as the Director of Defence Information at Nigeria’s Defence Headquarters between 2015 and 2017, died while in detention at the hands of the terrorists who abducted him. 

Rabe was abducted alongside his wife, Hajia Amina, on May 30. A native of Batsari from Katsina State, he was kidnapped on the Matazu–Sayaya road, a road that has now become one of the most volatile in the North West. 

“It is with profound sadness that we confirm the General’s death while in bandits’ captivity. Despite the relentless and concerted efforts of the State Government and various Security Agencies to secure his safe release, the situation ended in this tragedy. The deceased Retired General died a natural death from complications of diabetes and hypertension,” Nasiru said in the statement.

The abduction of the general had exposed how deeply terrorism has eaten into the fabric of Nigeria, especially the North West, where criminals have turned into full-time armed gangs that engage in kidnapping, pillaging, and other forms of terrorism. 

For over a decade, Katsina and other states in the region have faced incessant attacks from these terrorists, forcing local authorities to consider a “reconciliation” with the armed groups to restore peace. Some local government areas in Katsina, such as Jibia, Batsari, Kurfi, Safana, Danmusa, Matazu, Musawa, Kankara, Faskari, Malumfashi, and Bakori, have agreed to establish peace accords with terrorists in their areas. 

However, while some of these areas have seen relative calm, the situation in Matazu, Bakori, Musawa, Kankia, and Malumfashi has only deteriorated. The Marabar Musawa – Musawa – Matazu – Kafin Soli road (where the General was abducted) became volatile after the peace deal broke. 

Even before May 30, there were several cases of abduction on the road as well as attacks on communities and towns in the area. HumAngle reports that Muhammadu Fulani, the terrorists’ leader in the Matazu – Musawa area, is accusing the state government of arresting three of his men and seizing his livestock. 

Ambush on a wedding road 

Rabe was travelling with his driver and wife to Katsina for a wedding ceremony when the terrorists emerged near a village called Zakin Baure, blocked the road, and opened fire on his vehicle, a red coloured Peugeot 406 car, according to media reports. That forced the vehicle to a halt, enabling the terrorists to abduct him and his wife and push them into a nearby forest. His driver, however, escaped with gunshot injuries and was later admitted to a hospital. 

They were heading toward Katsina city for a family wedding through the perilous corridor, Marabar Musawa–Musawa–Matazu–Kafin Soli, which sits at the fault line of a regional peace architecture that has become increasingly fragile.

Abduction timeline 

June 6: The terrorists released a video clip of the couple begging for the government to rescue them. The wife, who spoke, asked the government to facilitate the release of some three terrorists arrested by security agents in exchange for the couple’s freedom. 

June 8: The terror group leader, Muhammadu Fulani, said he would not release the wife of the General, Amina, as promised, after the government dispatched security agents to the area to fight him. 

June 11: A video clip of the General, his wife and four others went viral on social media. HumAngle checks revealed that the other four persons in the video were members of the All Progressive Congress (APC) from Danja Local Government Area of the state who were abducted last month on the same road. 

June 12: A special prayer session was organised at the Sa’ad Bin Abi Waqqas Mosque in Barhim Estate, Katsina city, at 5 p.m.. Several relatives and friends of the Major General attended the prayer session, where the Imam called on the government to ensure the safe return of Rabe, his wife, and all abducted victims.

June 13 (morning): A WhatsApp message began circulating, especially in Katsina. The message said the General had died Friday night, June 12. “Innalillaihi wa ina ilaihil rajiun. This is to announce on a sad note. The death of General Rabe Abubakar last night at the hands of the bandits.” A HumAngle reporter also received a message from a retired civil servant asking for confirmation. 

June 13 (afternoon): The Katsina State government, through the Ministry of Internal Security and Home Affairs, confirmed the General’s death, saying that he died “a natural death from complications of diabetes and hypertension”. 

A symbol, and a warning

General Rabe’s death has reverberated through Nigeria’s security establishment and social media platforms precisely because of who he was: a man who had once stood before cameras explaining the state’s fight against terrorism. It also brings renewed attention to Nigeria’s growing terrorism and persistent security challenges facing several northern states despite ongoing military operations against the armed groups. 

Dikko Umaru Radda, the Katsina State governor, called the episode a “dark moment,” saying it highlighted the urgent need for a stronger, more coordinated security response, while pledging that those responsible would be pursued.

For residents of Katsina’s volatile corridors, Rabe’s death is a confirmation of what many have long understood: on the state’s insecure roads, rank, fame, and a lifetime of service offer no immunity at all.

His wife’s status was not addressed in Saturday’s statement, and her deceased husband was buried according to Islamic rites, but sources told HumAngle she was released alongside her husband’s remains.